Search

The American Heart Association (AHA), founded in 1924, is anchored in the core belief that scientific research can lead the way to better prevention, treatment, recovery, and ultimately a cure for cardiovascular disease. Historically, the association's involvement in international efforts centered on scientific cooperation. Activities mostly involved AHA leadership presenting at international scientific meetings and leaders from other countries sharing scientific and medical information at AHA meetings. Although the AHA's and American Stroke Association's international efforts have expanded substantially since those early days, global knowledge exchange remains the bedrock of its international endeavors. As the AHA turns 100, we reflect on the successful global efforts in prevention, resuscitation, global advocacy, quality improvement, and health equity that have guided the organization to a place of readiness for "advancing health and hope, for everyone, everywhere." Motivated by the enormous potential for population health gains in an aging world, the AHA is entering its second century with redoubled commitment to improving global cardiovascular and cerebrovascular health for all.

In 1924, the founders of the American Heart Association (AHA) envisioned an international society focused on the heart and aimed at facilitating research, disseminating information, increasing public awareness, and developing public health policy related to heart disease. This presidential advisory provides a comprehensive review of the past century of cardiovascular and stroke science, with a focus on the AHA's contributions, as well as informed speculation about the future of cardiovascular science into the next century of the organization's history. The AHA is a leader in fundamental, translational, clinical, and population science, and it promotes the concept of the "learning health system," in which a continuous cycle of evidence-based practice leads to practice-based evidence, permitting an iterative refinement in clinical evidence and care. This advisory presents the AHA's journey over the past century from instituting professional membership to establishing extraordinary research funding programs; translating evidence to practice through clinical practice guidelines; affecting systems of care through quality programs, certification, and implementation; leading important advocacy efforts at the federal, state and local levels; and building global coalitions around cardiovascular and stroke science and public health. Recognizing an exciting potential future for science and medicine, the advisory offers a vision for even greater impact for the AHA's second century in its continued mission to be a relentless force for longer, healthier lives.

Objective: Awareness of diabetes as a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD) may enhance uptake of screening for diabetes and primary prevention of CVD., Research Design and Methods: The American Heart Association conducted an online survey in 50 countries. The main outcome of this study was the proportion of individuals in each country who recognized diabetes as a CVD risk factor. We also examined variation by sex, age, geographic region, and country-level economic development., Results: Among 48,988 respondents, 15,747 (32.1%) identified diabetes as a major CVD risk factor. Awareness was similar among men and women, but increased with age, and was greater in high-income than in middle-income countries., Conclusions: Two-thirds of adults in surveyed countries did not recognize diabetes as a major CVD risk factor. Given the increasing global burden of diabetes and CVD, this finding underscores the need for concerted efforts to raise public health awareness., (© 2024 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Aims: The clinical correlates and outcomes of asymptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) in hospitalized patients are largely unknown. We aimed to investigate the clinical correlates and in-hospital outcomes of asymptomatic AF in hospitalized Chinese patients., Methods and Results: We conducted a cross-sectional registry study of inpatients with AF enrolled in the Improving Care for Cardiovascular Disease in China-Atrial Fibrillation Project between February 2015 and December 2019. We investigated the clinical characteristics of asymptomatic AF and the association between the clinical correlates and the in-hospital outcomes of asymptomatic AF. Asymptomatic and symptomatic AF were defined according to the European Heart Rhythm Association score. Asymptomatic patients were more commonly males (56.3%) and had more comorbidities such as hypertension (57.4%), diabetes mellitus (18.6%), peripheral artery disease (PAD; 2.3%), coronary artery disease (55.5%), previous history of stroke/transient ischaemic attack (TIA; 17.9%), and myocardial infarction (MI; 5.4%); however, they had less prevalent heart failure (9.6%) or left ventricular ejection fractions ≤40% (7.3%). Asymptomatic patients were more often hospitalized with a non-AF diagnosis as the main diagnosis and were more commonly first diagnosed with AF (23.9%) and long-standing persistent/permanent AF (17.0%). The independent determinants of asymptomatic presentation were male sex, long-standing persistent AF/permanent AF, previous history of stroke/TIA, MI, PAD, and previous treatment with anti-platelet drugs. The incidence of in-hospital clinical events such as all-cause death, ischaemic stroke/TIA, and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) was higher in asymptomatic patients than in symptomatic patients, and asymptomatic clinical status was an independent risk factor for in-hospital all-cause death, ischaemic stroke/TIA, and ACS., Conclusion: Asymptomatic AF is common among hospitalized patients with AF. Asymptomatic clinical status is associated with male sex, comorbidities, and a higher risk of in-hospital outcomes. The adoption of effective management strategies for patients with AF should not be solely based on clinical symptoms., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: None declared., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Objective: Ideal cardiovascular health (CVH) was developed to promote CVH as a key component of primordial prevention. Mobile short message service (SMS) is useful for improving health behaviours. We aim to test the effectiveness of SMS intervention in women to improve CVH., Methods: In a single-blinded, randomised, controlled study, 620 women, aged 35-70 years, without cardiovascular disease, were enrolled in SMS intervention versus no SMS. CVH metrics by self-report, and biochemical laboratory, anthropometric and blood pressure measurements were collected during home visits at baseline and 9 months. Women were categorised as having poor (0-2), intermediate (3-4) or ideal (5-7) CVH according to the number of ideal CVH metrics. Participants were randomised 1:1 to SMS intervention versus control. SMS was sent every 5-6 days for 9 months. The primary outcome was the difference in the proportion of women with ideal CVH between SMS and control groups at 9 months. Rates of intermediate CVH, poor CVH and each of the seven ideal CV health metrics at 9 months were key secondary endpoints., Results: At 9 months, there was no significant difference between groups for the primary outcome (16.3% at baseline and 13.3% at 9 months, and 10.1% and 11.1%, in SMS and control groups, respectively, adjusted RR 1.0; 95% CI 0.6 to 1.6). Similarly, there were no significant differences between groups for the key secondary endpoints. SMS had an acceptance rate of 94.9%., Conclusions: Behavioural SMS intervention did not improve rates of ideal CVH in women, despite being feasible and well received., Trial Registration Number: 6377., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MA has served on an advisory board for AstraZeneca, Bayer, Novo Nordisk, Boehringer, Tecnofarma, Axon Pharma, Novartis and has received fees for speaking from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, Novo Nordisk, Tecnofarma, TEVA Pharmaceuticals, Abbott, Axon Pharma, Elli Lilly. PV has served on advisory boards for Axon Pharma, Novo Nordisk, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, and has received fees for speaking from: Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca Novo Nordisk, Axon Pharma, Abbott, Bayer and Tecnofarma, Organon, Teva Pharmaceuticals and fees for being the principal investigator for the following Clinical Studies: Horizon (Novartis)/ Victorion Prevent (Novartis)., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: The REDUCE-IT (Reduction of Cardiovascular Events with Icosapent Ethyl-Intervention Trial) trial demonstrated that high-dose icosapent-ethyl reduced the risk of ischemic events in statin-treated patients with elevated triglycerides (TG) and either atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) or diabetes plus at least one risk factor., Methods and Results: Using data from REACH (Reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health), a large international registry of outpatients with or at risk of ASCVD, we evaluated the proportion of patients potentially eligible for enrolment in REDUCE-IT and compared their outcomes to those excluded because of low TG. Among 62,464 patients with either ASCVD or diabetes enrolled in the REACH Registry, 1036/8418 (12.3%) patients in primary prevention and 6049/54046 (11.2%) patients in secondary prevention (11.3% overall) would have been eligible for inclusion in REDUCE-IT. Compared with patients excluded for low TG level, adjusted risk of the primary composite outcome of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), non-fatal stroke, unstable angina, or coronary revascularization was higher in the REDUCE-IT eligible group (HR:1.06, 95%CI:1.00-1.13, p = 0.04). In addition, unstable angina, non-fatal MI, percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting were also more frequent in the REDUCE-IT eligible group (HR:1.17, 95%CI:1.07-1.27, p < 0.001; HR:1.25, 95%CI:1.07-1.45, p < 0.001; HR:1.42, 95%CI:1.27-1.57, p < 0.001; HR:1.43, 95%CI:1.19-1.71, p < 0.001, respectively), whereas the adjusted risk of non-fatal stroke was lower (HR:0.64, 95%CI:0.54-0.75, p < 0.001)., Conclusion: In this large international registry of patients with or at high-risk of ASCVD, 11.3% met the REDUCE-IT trial selection criteria. REDUCE-IT eligible patients were found to be at higher risk of cardiac atherothrombotic events, but at lower risk of stroke than trial-ineligible patients with lower TG., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) remains the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States (U.S.) and incurs significant cost to the healthcare system. Management of cholesterol remains central for ASCVD prevention and has been the focus of multiple national guidelines. In this review, we compare the American Heart Association (AHA)/American College of Cardiology (ACC) and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) Cholesterol guidelines. We review the evidence base that was used to generate recommendations focusing on 4 distinct themes: 1) the threshold of absolute 10-year ASCVD risk to start a clinician-patient discussion for the initiation of statin therapy in primary prevention patients; 2) the utility of coronary artery calcium score to guide clinician-patient risk discussion pertaining to the initiation of statin therapy for primary ASCVD prevention; 3) the use of moderate versus high-intensity statin therapy in patients with established ASCVD; and 4) the utility of ordering lipid panels after initiation or intensification of lipid lowering therapy to document efficacy and monitor adherence to lipid lowering therapy. We discuss why the VA/DoD and AHA/ACC may have reached different conclusions on these key issues., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Salim S. Virani, Research support: Department of Veterans Affairs, World Heart Federation, Tahir and Jooma Family. Honorarium: American College of Cardiology (Associate Editor for Innovations, acc.org). Vijay Nambi, Site PI for study sponsored by AMGEN. Supported by VA MERIT award. Provisional patent along with BCM, Roche on use of biomarkers in prediction of Heart failure, (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

East Asian patients have reduced anti-ischemic benefits and increased bleeding risk during antithrombotic therapies compared with Caucasian patients. As potent P2Y 12 receptor inhibitors (e.g., ticagrelor and prasugrel) and direct oral anticoagulants are commonly used in current daily practice, the unique risk-benefit trade-off in East Asians has been a topic of emerging interest. In this article, we propose updated evidence and future directions of antithrombotic treatment in East Asian patients., Competing Interests: S.G. is a consultant for Janssen and Bristol-Myers Squibb. S.G. received research grant from Sanofi, Pfizer, and Ono, and independent research grant support from Bristol-Myers Squibb (33999603). S.G. also received personal fee from Thrombosis Research Institute (London, United Kingdom) as a member of Steering Committee for GARFIELD-AF and GARFIELD-VTE and from the American Heart Association as an associate editor. T.G. research is funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) TRR 240 “Platelets—Molecular, Cellular and Systemic Functions in Health and Disease” (Project number 374031971). T.G. received personal fees from Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Ferrer, and Pfizer, and research grants and personal fees from Bayer Healthcare, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, and Eli Lilly. D.A.G. reports institutional grants from Bayer and BMS, and speaker fees from Bayer and AstraZeneca. G.Y.H. is a consultant for Bayer/Janssen, BMS/Pfizer, Medtronic, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Verseon, and Daiichi-Sankyo; speaker for Bayer, BMS/Pfizer, Medtronic, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Daiichi-Sankyo. No fees were directly received personally. D.A.J. has received consulting fees or honoraria from Amgen, Aralez, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chiesi, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Haemonetics, Janssen, Merck, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Pfizer, Sanofi, and The Medicines Company, and has received payments for participation in review activities from CeloNova and St. Jude Medical. He also declares that his institution has received research grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, CeloNova, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Matsutani Chemical Industry Co., Merck, Novartis, Osprey Medical, Renal Guard Solutions, and the Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. G.P.A.G. reports serving as a consultant and receiving fees/honoraria from Daiichi Sankyo, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Merck, Boehringer, New Haven Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, and CSL, and receiving grants from the National Institutes of Health, Daiichi Sankyo, CSL, AstraZeneca, Harvard Clinical Research Institute, Haemonetics, New Haven Pharmaceuticals, Duke Clinical Research Institute, Sinnowa, and Coramed. P.A.G. has patents in the field of platelet function testing. M.H.J. has received honoraria for lectures from AstraZeneca, Sanofi-Aventis, Daiichi Sankyo/Lilly, Haemonetics, Otsuka, Han-mi Pharmaceuticals, and Yuhan Pharmaceuticals, and research grants or support from AstraZeneca, Korean Society of Interventional Cardiology, Han-mi Pharmaceuticals, Yuhan Pharmaceuticals, Otsuka, and Haemonetics. The other authors report no conflicts of interest., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Clinical decisions are ideally based on evidence generated from multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating clinical outcomes, but historically, few clinical guideline recommendations have been based entirely on this type of evidence., Objective: To determine the class and level of evidence (LOE) supporting current major cardiovascular society guideline recommendations, and changes in LOE over time., Data Sources: Current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) and European Society of Cardiology (ESC) clinical guideline documents (2008-2018), as identified on cardiovascular society websites, and immediate predecessors to these guideline documents (1999-2014), as referenced in current guideline documents., Study Selection: Comprehensive guideline documents including recommendations organized by class and LOE., Data Extraction and Synthesis: The number of recommendations and the distribution of LOE (A [supported by data from multiple RCTs or a single, large RCT], B [supported by data from observational studies or a single RCT], and C [supported by expert opinion only]) were determined for each guideline document., Main Outcomes and Measures: The proportion of guideline recommendations supported by evidence from multiple RCTs (LOE A)., Results: Across 26 current ACC/AHA guidelines (2930 recommendations; median, 121 recommendations per guideline [25th-75th percentiles, 76-155]), 248 recommendations (8.5%) were classified as LOE A, 1465 (50.0%) as LOE B, and 1217 (41.5%) as LOE C. The median proportion of LOE A recommendations was 7.9% (25th-75th percentiles, 0.9%-15.2%). Across 25 current ESC guideline documents (3399 recommendations; median, 130 recommendations per guideline [25th-75th percentiles, 111-154]), 484 recommendations (14.2%) were classified as LOE A, 1053 (31.0%) as LOE B, and 1862 (54.8%) as LOE C. When comparing current guidelines with prior versions, the proportion of recommendations that were LOE A did not increase in either ACC/AHA (median, 9.0% [current] vs 11.7% [prior]) or ESC guidelines (median, 15.1% [current] vs 17.6% [prior])., Conclusions and Relevance: Among recommendations in major cardiovascular society guidelines, only a small percentage were supported by evidence from multiple RCTs or a single, large RCT. This pattern does not appear to have meaningfully improved from 2008 to 2018.

Despite numerous advances in the prevention and treatment of atherosclerosis, cardiovascular disease remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Novel and inexpensive interventions that can contribute to the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease are of interest. Numerous studies have reported on the benefits of meditation. Meditation instruction and practice is widely accessible and inexpensive and may thus be a potential attractive cost-effective adjunct to more traditional medical therapies. Accordingly, this American Heart Association scientific statement systematically reviewed the data on the potential benefits of meditation on cardiovascular risk. Neurophysiological and neuroanatomical studies demonstrate that meditation can have long-standing effects on the brain, which provide some biological plausibility for beneficial consequences on the physiological basal state and on cardiovascular risk. Studies of the effects of meditation on cardiovascular risk have included those investigating physiological response to stress, smoking cessation, blood pressure reduction, insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome, endothelial function, inducible myocardial ischemia, and primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Overall, studies of meditation suggest a possible benefit on cardiovascular risk, although the overall quality and, in some cases, quantity of study data are modest. Given the low costs and low risks of this intervention, meditation may be considered as an adjunct to guideline-directed cardiovascular risk reduction by those interested in this lifestyle modification, with the understanding that the benefits of such intervention remain to be better established. Further research on meditation and cardiovascular risk is warranted. Such studies, to the degree possible, should utilize randomized study design, be adequately powered to meet the primary study outcome, strive to achieve low drop-out rates, include long-term follow-up, and be performed by those without inherent bias in outcome., (© 2017 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley.)

Ingestion of sodium is essential to health, but excess sodium intake is a risk factor for hypertension and cardiovascular disease. Defining an optimal range of sodium intake in populations has been challenging and controversial. Clinical trials evaluating the effect of sodium reduction on blood pressure have shown blood pressure lowering effects down to sodium intake of less than 1.5 g/day. Findings from these blood pressure trials form the basis for current guideline recommendations to reduce sodium intake to less than 2.3 g/day. However, these clinical trials employed interventions that are not feasible for population-wide implementation (i.e. feeding studies or intensive behavioural interventions), particularly in low and middle-income countries. Prospective cohort studies have identified the optimal range of sodium intake to reside in the moderate range (3-5 g/day), where the risk of cardiovascular disease and death is lowest. Therefore, there is consistent evidence from clinical trials and observational studies to support reducing sodium intake to less than 5 g/day in populations, but inconsistent evidence for further reductions below a moderate intake range (3-5 g/day). Unfortunately, there are no large randomized controlled trials comparing low sodium intake (< 3 g/day) to moderate sodium intake (3-5 g/day) in general populations to determine the net clinical effects of low sodium intake. Until such trials are completed, it is likely that controversy about optimal sodium intake range will continue. This working group calls for the completion of large definitive clinical trials to clarify the range of sodium intake for optimal cardiovascular health within the moderate to low intake range. We support interventions to reduce sodium intake in populations who consume high sodium intake (> 5 g/day), which should be embedded within an overall healthy dietary pattern., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2017. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: In 2008, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute convened an Implementation Science Work Group to assess evidence-based strategies for effectively implementing clinical practice guidelines. This was part of a larger effort to update existing clinical practice guidelines on cholesterol, blood pressure, and overweight/obesity., Objectives: Review evidence from the published implementation science literature and identify effective or promising strategies to enhance the adoption and implementation of clinical practice guidelines., Methods: This systematic review was conducted on 4 critical questions, each focusing on the adoption and effectiveness of 4 intervention strategies: (1) reminders, (2) educational outreach visits, (3) audit and feedback, and (4) provider incentives. A scoping review of the Rx for Change database of systematic reviews was used to identify promising guideline implementation interventions aimed at providers. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed a priori for each question, and the published literature was initially searched up to 2012, and then updated with a supplemental search to 2015. Two independent reviewers screened the returned citations to identify relevant reviews and rated the quality of each included review., Results: Audit and feedback and educational outreach visits were generally effective in improving both process of care (15 of 21 reviews and 12 of 13 reviews, respectively) and clinical outcomes (7 of 12 reviews and 3 of 5 reviews, respectively). Provider incentives showed mixed effectiveness for improving both process of care (3 of 4 reviews) and clinical outcomes (3 reviews equally distributed between generally effective, mixed, and generally ineffective). Reminders showed mixed effectiveness for improving process of care outcomes (27 reviews with 11 mixed and 3 generally ineffective results) and were generally ineffective for clinical outcomes (18 reviews with 6 mixed and 9 generally ineffective results). Educational outreach visits (2 of 2 reviews), reminders (3 of 4 reviews), and provider incentives (1 of 1 review) were generally effective for cost reduction. Educational outreach visits (1 of 1 review) and provider incentives (1 of 1 review) were also generally effective for cost-effectiveness outcomes. Barriers to clinician adoption or adherence to guidelines included time constraints (8 reviews/overviews); limited staffing resources (2 overviews); timing (5 reviews/overviews); clinician skepticism (5 reviews/overviews); clinician knowledge of guidelines (4 reviews/overviews); and higher age of the clinician (1 overview). Facilitating factors included guideline characteristics such as format, resources, and end-user involvement (6 reviews/overviews); involving stakeholders (5 reviews/overviews); leadership support (5 reviews/overviews); scope of implementation (5 reviews/overviews); organizational culture such as multidisciplinary teams and low-baseline adherence (9 reviews/overviews); and electronic guidelines systems (3 reviews)., Conclusion: The strategies of audit and feedback and educational outreach visits were generally effective in improving both process of care and clinical outcomes. Reminders and provider incentives showed mixed effectiveness, or were generally ineffective. No general conclusion could be reached about cost effectiveness, because of limitations in the evidence. Important gaps exist in the evidence on effectiveness of implementation interventions, especially regarding clinical outcomes, cost effectiveness and contextual issues affecting successful implementation., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Cardiology Foundation and American Heart Association, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The extent to which angina is associated with future cardiovascular events in patients with coronary artery disease has long been debated., Methods and Results: Included were outpatients with established coronary artery disease who were enrolled in the REACH registry and were followed for 4 years. Angina at baseline was defined as necessitating episodic or permanent antianginal treatment. The primary end point was the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Secondary end points included heart failure, cardiovascular hospitalizations, and coronary revascularization. The independent association between angina and first/total events was examined using Cox and logistic regression models. Out of 26 159 patients with established coronary artery disease, 13 619 (52%) had angina at baseline. Compared with patients without angina, patients with angina were more likely to be older, female, and had more heart failure and polyvascular disease (P<0.001 for each). Compared with patients without angina, patients with angina had higher rates of first primary end-point event (14.2% versus 16.3%, unadjusted hazard ratio 1.19, CI 1.11-1.27, P<0.001; adjusted hazard ratio 1.06, CI 0.99-1.14, P=0.11), and total primary end-point events (adjusted risk ratio 1.08, CI 1.01-1.16, P=0.03). Patients with angina were at increased risk for heart failure (adjusted odds ratio 1.17, CI 1.06-1.28, P=0.002), cardiovascular hospitalizations (adjusted odds ratio 1.29, CI 1.21-1.38, P<0.001), and coronary revascularization (adjusted odds ratio 1.23, CI 1.13-1.34, P<0.001)., Conclusions: Patients with stable coronary artery disease and angina have higher rates of future cardiovascular events compared with patients without angina. After adjustment, angina was only weakly associated with cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, but significantly associated with heart failure, cardiovascular hospitalization, and coronary revascularization., (© 2016 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley Blackwell.)

In 2011, the United Nations set key targets to reach by 2025 to reduce the risk of premature noncommunicable disease death by 25% by 2025. With cardiovascular disease being the largest contributor to global mortality, accounting for nearly half of the 36 million annual noncommunicable disease deaths, achieving the 2025 goal requires that cardiovascular disease and its risk factors be aggressively addressed. The Global Cardiovascular Disease Taskforce, comprising the World Heart Federation, American Heart Association, American College of Cardiology Foundation, European Heart Network, and European Society of Cardiology, with expanded representation from Asia, Africa, and Latin America, along with global cardiovascular disease experts, disseminates information and approaches to reach the United Nations 2025 targets. The writing committee, which reflects Global Cardiovascular Disease Taskforce membership, engaged the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, to develop region-specific estimates of premature cardiovascular mortality in 2025 based on various scenarios. Results show that >5 million premature CVD deaths among men and 2.8 million among women are projected worldwide by 2025, which can be reduced to 3.5 million and 2.2 million, respectively, if risk factor targets for blood pressure, tobacco use, diabetes mellitus, and obesity are achieved. However, global risk factor targets have various effects, depending on region. For most regions, United Nations targets for reducing systolic blood pressure and tobacco use have more substantial effects on future scenarios compared with maintaining current levels of body mass index and fasting plasma glucose. However, preventing increases in body mass index has the largest effect in some high-income countries. An approach achieving reductions in multiple risk factors has the largest impact for almost all regions. Achieving these goals can be accomplished only if countries set priorities, implement cost-effective population wide strategies, and collaborate in public-private partnerships across multiple sectors., (© 2016 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Background: Electrocardiographic (ECG) abnormalities are independently associated with poor outcomes in the general population. Their prevalence and determinants were assessed in the understudied African American population with type 2 diabetes., Methods: Standard 12-lead ECGs were digitally recorded in 635 unrelated African American-Diabetes Heart Study (AA-DHS) participants, automatically processed at a central lab, read, and coded using standard Minnesota ECG Classification. Age- and sex-specific prevalence rates of ECG abnormalities were calculated and logistic regression models were fitted to examine cross-sectional associations between participant characteristics and ECG abnormalities., Results: Participants were 56% women with a mean age of 56 years; 60% had at least one minor or major ECG abnormality [23% ⩾ 1 major (or major plus minor), and 37% ⩾ 1 minor (with no major)]. Men had a higher prevalence of ⩾ 1 minor or major ECG abnormality (66.1% men vs. 55.6% women, p=0.0089). In univariate analysis, age, past history of cardiovascular disease, diabetes duration, systolic blood pressure, sex and statin use were associated with the presence of any (major or minor) ECG abnormalities. In a multivariate model including variables, female sex (OR [95% CI] 0.79 [0.67, 0.93]), statin use (0.79 [0.67, 0.93]) and diabetes duration (1.03 [1.0, 1.05]) remained statistically significant., Conclusions: Nearly three out of five African Americans with diabetes had at least one ECG abnormality. Female sex and statin use were significantly associated with lower odds of any ECG abnormality and diabetes duration was significantly associated with higher odds of any ECG abnormality in the multivariable model., (Copyright © 2014 Ministry of Health, Saudi Arabia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Despite overall improvements in cardiovascular-disease therapies and outcomes, medication nonadherence remains an important barrier to effective secondary prevention of atherothrombotic disease., Hypothesis: Long-term medication adherence in outpatients with stable atherothrombotic disease is impacted by demographic and clinical factors., Methods: We examined data from the prospective international Reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health (REACH) Registry. Analyses were derived from 25 737 patients with established atherothrombotic disease with complete adherence data at enrollment and at year 4. Adherence was defined as patients' self-report of taking medications based on class I American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines for secondary prevention as defined, including antiplatelet agents, statins, and antihypertensive medications., Results: Among patients with atherothrombotic disease, 12 500 (48.6%) were deemed adherent to guideline-recommended medications. Adherent patients were younger, white, and had less polyvascular disease. Hispanic and East Asian patients were less likely to be adherent as compared with white patients (odds ratio [OR]: 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59-0.88; and OR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.53-0.83, respectively). Patients who had a nonfatal MI or underwent coronary angioplasty/stenting during follow-up were more likely to be adherent compared with patients without these events (OR: 1.73, 95% CI: 1.25-2.38; and OR: 2.15, 95% CI: 1.72-2.67, respectively). On the other hand, nonfatal stroke during follow-up was inversely associated with adherence (OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.61-0.97)., Conclusions: Using a large international registry of outpatients with atherothrombotic disease, we found that age, region, race/ethnicity, and incident cardiovascular events were predictive of long-term guideline adherence for secondary prevention, suggesting that certain patient groups may benefit from targeted interventions to improve adherence., (© 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: The presence and severity of coronary artery calcified plaque (CAC) differs markedly between individuals of African and European descent, suggesting that admixture mapping may be informative for identifying genetic variants associated with subclinical cardiovascular disease., Methods and Results: Admixture mapping of CAC was performed in 1040 unrelated African Americans with type 2 diabetes mellitus from the African American-Diabetes Heart Study, Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis and Family Heart Study using the Illumina custom ancestry informative marker panel. All cohorts obtained computed tomography scanning of the coronary arteries using identical protocols. For each ancestry informative marker, the probability of inheriting 0, 1, and 2 copies of a European-derived allele was determined. Linkage analysis was performed by testing for association between each ancestry informative marker using these probabilities and CAC, accounting for global ancestry, age, sex, and study. Markers on 1p32.3 in the GLIS1 gene (rs6663966, logarithm of odds [LOD]=3.7), 1q32.1 near CHIT1 (rs7530895, LOD=3.1), 4q21.2 near PRKG2 (rs1212373, LOD=3.0), and 11q25 in the OPCML gene (rs6590705, LOD=3.4) had statistically significant LOD scores, whereas markers on 8q22.2 (rs6994682, LOD=2.7), 9p21.2 (rs439314, LOD=2.7), and 13p32.1 (rs7492028, LOD=2.8) manifested suggestive evidence of linkage. These regions were uniformly characterized by higher levels of European ancestry associating with higher levels or odds of CAC. Findings were replicated in 1350 African Americans without diabetes mellitus and 2497 diabetic European Americans from Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis and the Diabetes Heart Study., Conclusions: Fine mapping these regions will likely identify novel genetic variants that contribute to CAC and clarify racial differences in susceptibility to subclinical cardiovascular disease.

Context: β-Blockers remain the standard of care after a myocardial infarction (MI). However, the benefit of β-blocker use in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) but no history of MI, those with a remote history of MI, and those with only risk factors for CAD is unclear., Objective: To assess the association of β-blocker use with cardiovascular events in stable patients with a prior history of MI, in those with CAD but no history of MI, and in those with only risk factors for CAD., Design, Setting, and Patients: Longitudinal, observational study of patients in the Reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health (REACH) registry who were divided into 3 cohorts: known prior MI (n = 14,043), known CAD without MI (n = 12,012), or those with CAD risk factors only (n = 18,653). Propensity score matching was used for the primary analyses. The last follow-up data collection was April 2009., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal MI, or nonfatal stroke. The secondary outcome was the primary outcome plus hospitalization for atherothrombotic events or a revascularization procedure., Results: Among the 44,708 patients, 21,860 were included in the propensity score-matched analysis. With a median follow-up of 44 months (interquartile range, 35-45 months), event rates were not significantly different in patients with β-blocker use compared with those without β-blocker use for any of the outcomes tested, even in the prior MI cohort (489 [16.93%] vs 532 [18.60%], respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 0.90 [95% CI, 0.79-1.03]; P = .14). In the CAD without MI cohort, the associated event rates were not significantly different in those with β-blocker use for the primary outcome (391 [12.94%]) vs without β-blocker use (405 [13.55%]) (HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.79-1.08]; P = .31), with higher rates for the secondary outcome (1101 [30.59%] vs 1002 [27.84%]; odds ratio [OR], 1.14 [95% CI, 1.03-1.27]; P = .01) and for the tertiary outcome of hospitalization (870 [24.17%] vs 773 [21.48%]; OR, 1.17 [95% CI, 1.04-1.30]; P = .01). In the cohort with CAD risk factors only, the event rates were higher for the primary outcome with β-blocker use (467 [14.22%]) vs without β-blocker use (403 [12.11%]) (HR, 1.18 [95% CI, 1.02-1.36]; P = .02), for the secondary outcome (870 [22.01%] vs 797 [20.17%]; OR, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.00-1.24]; P = .04) but not for the tertiary outcomes of MI (89 [2.82%] vs 68 [2.00%]; HR, 1.36 [95% CI, 0.97-1.90]; P = .08) and stroke (210 [6.55%] vs 168 [5.12%]; HR, 1.22 [95% CI, 0.99-1.52]; P = .06). However, in those with recent MI (≤1 year), β-blocker use was associated with a lower incidence of the secondary outcome (OR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.64-0.92])., Conclusion: In this observational study of patients with either CAD risk factors only, known prior MI, or known CAD without MI, the use of β-blockers was not associated with a lower risk of composite cardiovascular events.

Background: Living alone, a proxy for social support, has been inconsistently linked with cardiovascular risk., Methods: We investigated whether living alone was associated with increased mortality and cardiovascular risk in the global REduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health (REACH) Registry. Stable outpatients at risk of or with atherothrombosis were recruited from December 1, 2003, through December 31, 2004, and followed up to 4 years for cardiovascular events. Events were examined by living arrangement with risk adjustment for age, sex, clinical risk factors, therapy, preexisting vascular disease, and sociodemographic factors. Effect modification was tested by age, sex, employment, ethnicity, education, and geography., Results: Among the 44 573 REACH participants, 8594 (19%) were living alone. Living alone was associated with higher 4-year mortality (14.1% vs 11.1%) and cardiovascular death (8.6% vs 6.8%; log-rank P < .01 for both comparisons); however, there was significant effect modification by age (P value for interaction = .03). Specifically, among younger participants, living alone compared with those living with others was associated with higher mortality (age 45-65 years: 7.7% vs 5.7%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.24 [95% CI, 1.01-1.51]; age 66-80 years: 13.2% vs 12.3%; adjusted HR, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.01-1.26]), but this was not observed among older participants (age > 80 years: 24.6% vs 28.4%; adjusted HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.79-1.06]). A similar trend was observed for the risk of cardiovascular death., Conclusions: In an international outpatient population with atherothrombosis aged 45 years or older, living alone was associated with increased mortality among all but the most elderly patients, although this observation warrants confirmation.

Background and Purpose: Current US guideline statements regarding primary and secondary cardiovascular risk prediction and prevention use absolute risk estimates to identify patients who are at high risk for vascular disease events and who may benefit from specific preventive interventions. These guidelines do not explicitly include patients with stroke, however. This statement provides an overview of evidence and arguments supporting (1) the inclusion of patients with stroke, and atherosclerotic stroke in particular, among those considered to be at high absolute risk of cardiovascular disease and (2) the inclusion of stroke as part of the outcome cluster in risk prediction instruments for vascular disease., Methods and Results: Writing group members were nominated by the committee co-chairs on the basis of their previous work in relevant topic areas and were approved by the American Heart Association (AHA) Stroke Council's Scientific Statements Oversight Committee and the AHA Manuscript Oversight Committee. The writers used systematic literature reviews (covering the period from January 1980 to March 2010), reference to previously published guidelines, personal files, and expert opinion to summarize existing evidence, indicate gaps in current knowledge, and, when appropriate, formulate recommendations using standard AHA criteria. All members of the writing group had the opportunity to comment on the recommendations and approved the final version of this document. The guideline underwent extensive AHA internal peer review, Stroke Council leadership review, and Scientific Statements Oversight Committee review before consideration and approval by the AHA Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee. There are several reasons to consider stroke patients, and particularly patients with atherosclerotic stroke, among the groups of patients at high absolute risk of coronary and cardiovascular disease. First, evidence suggests that patients with ischemic stroke are at high absolute risk of fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction or sudden death, approximating the ≥20% absolute risk over 10 years that has been used in some guidelines to define coronary risk equivalents. Second, inclusion of atherosclerotic stroke would be consistent with the reasons for inclusion of diabetes mellitus, peripheral vascular disease, chronic kidney disease, and other atherosclerotic disorders despite an absence of uniformity of evidence of elevated risks across all populations or patients. Third, the large-vessel atherosclerotic subtype of ischemic stroke shares pathophysiological mechanisms with these other disorders. Inclusion of stroke as a high-risk condition could result in an expansion of ≈10% in the number of patients considered to be at high risk. However, because of the heterogeneity of stroke, it is uncertain whether other stroke subtypes, including hemorrhagic and nonatherosclerotic ischemic stroke subtypes, should be considered to be at the same high levels of risk, and further research is needed. Inclusion of stroke with myocardial infarction and sudden death among the outcome cluster of cardiovascular events in risk prediction instruments, moreover, is appropriate because of the impact of stroke on morbidity and mortality, the similarity of many approaches to prevention of stroke and these other forms of vascular disease, and the importance of stroke relative to coronary disease in some subpopulations. Non-US guidelines often include stroke patients among others at high cardiovascular risk and include stroke as a relevant outcome along with cardiac end points., Conclusions: Patients with atherosclerotic stroke should be included among those deemed to be at high risk (≥20% over 10 years) of further atherosclerotic coronary events. Inclusion of nonatherosclerotic stroke subtypes remains less certain. For the purposes of primary prevention, ischemic stroke should be included among cardiovascular disease outcomes in absolute risk assessment algorithms. The inclusion of atherosclerotic ischemic stroke as a high-risk condition and the inclusion of ischemic stroke more broadly as an outcome will likely have important implications for prevention of cardiovascular disease, because the number of patients considered to be at high risk would grow substantially.

Background: Elevated serum cholesterol accounts for a considerable proportion of cardiovascular disease worldwide. An understanding of the relationship between country-level economic and health system factors and elevated cholesterol may provide insight for prioritization of cardiovascular prevention programs., Methods and Results: Using hierarchical models, we examined the relationship between elevated total cholesterol (>200 mg/dL) in 53 570 outpatients from 36 countries, and tertiles of several country-level indices: (1) gross national income, (2) total expenditure on health as percentage of gross domestic product, (3) government expenditure on health as percentage of total expenditure on health, (4) out-of-pocket expenditures as percentage of private expenditure on health, and the World Health Organization indices of (5) Health System Achievement and (6) Performance/Efficiency. Overall, 38% of outpatients had total cholesterol >200 mg/dL (>5.18 mmol/L), and 9.3% of the total variability in elevated cholesterol was at the country level; this proportion was higher for patients with (12.1%) versus without (7.4%) history of hyperlipidemia. Among patients with history of hyperlipidemia, countries in the highest tertile of gross national income or World Health Organization Health System Achievement had lower odds of elevated cholesterol than lower tertiles (P<0.001, for both). Countries in the highest tertile of out-of-pocket health expenditures had higher odds of elevated cholesterol than those in the lowest tertile (P<0.001). No significant associations were found for patients without history of hyperlipidemia., Conclusions: Global variations in the prevalence of elevated cholesterol among patients with history of hyperlipidemia are associated with country-level economic development and health system indices. These results support the need for strengthening efforts toward effective cardiovascular disease prevention and control and may provide insight for health policy setting at the national level.

Objective: To determine whether ethnic-specific differences in the prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and outcomes exist worldwide among individuals with stable arterial disease., Patients and Methods: From December 1, 2003, to June 30, 2004, the prospective, observational REduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health (REACH) Registry enrolled 49,602 out-patients with coronary artery disease, cerebrovascular disease, and/or peripheral arterial disease from 7 predefined ethnic/racial groups: white, Hispanic, East Asian, South Asian, Other Asian, black, and Other (comprising any race distinct from those specified). The baseline demographic and risk factor profiles, medication use, and 2-year cardiovascular outcomes were assessed among these groups., Results: The prevalence of traditional atherothrombotic risk factors varied significantly among the ethnic/racial groups. The use of medical therapies to reduce risk was comparable among all groups. At 2-year follow-up, the rate of cardiovascular death was significantly higher in blacks (6.1%) compared with all other ethnic/racial groups (3.9%; P=.01). Cardiovascular death rates were significantly lower in all 3 Asian ethnic/racial groups (overall, 2.1%) compared with the other groups (4.5%; P<.001)., Conclusion: The REACH Registry, a large international study of individuals with atherothrombotic disease, documents the important ethnic-specific differences in cardiovascular risk factors and variations in cardiovascular mortality that currently exist worldwide.

We conducted a cross-sectional study of NMR-derived HDL subclasses and alcohol intake among 2171 community-dwelling older adults with a large proportion of daily or near-daily alcohol consumers (44 %). We aimed to assess whether, in addition to increasing total HDL, alcohol may induce a beneficial shift in HDL particle size distribution. Participants were categorised based on reported alcohol intake (g per week) and on frequency (none, < 3 times/week, 3-4 times/week, ≥ 5 times/week). The association between alcohol intake and lipoprotein fractions was examined using sex-specific linear regression models adjusted for age, BMI, diabetes, current smoking, exercise and hormone therapy in women. There was a stepwise gradient with the highest weekly alcohol consumption associated with the highest total HDL size and greatest number of medium and large HDL particles, as well as higher total HDL concentrations (all P < 0.001); total small HDL did not differ. Alcohol-HDL size associations were similar in both sexes and did not differ by use of hormone replacement therapy in women. In conclusion, regular alcohol consumers had a higher number and percentage of large HDL particles than non-drinkers. These results suggest that one way that alcohol may decrease CVD is through potentially favourable changes in lipoprotein subclass composition.

In 2004, the first American Heart Association scientific statement on "Air Pollution and Cardiovascular Disease" concluded that exposure to particulate matter (PM) air pollution contributes to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. In the interim, numerous studies have expanded our understanding of this association and further elucidated the physiological and molecular mechanisms involved. The main objective of this updated American Heart Association scientific statement is to provide a comprehensive review of the new evidence linking PM exposure with cardiovascular disease, with a specific focus on highlighting the clinical implications for researchers and healthcare providers. The writing group also sought to provide expert consensus opinions on many aspects of the current state of science and updated suggestions for areas of future research. On the basis of the findings of this review, several new conclusions were reached, including the following: Exposure to PM <2.5 microm in diameter (PM(2.5)) over a few hours to weeks can trigger cardiovascular disease-related mortality and nonfatal events; longer-term exposure (eg, a few years) increases the risk for cardiovascular mortality to an even greater extent than exposures over a few days and reduces life expectancy within more highly exposed segments of the population by several months to a few years; reductions in PM levels are associated with decreases in cardiovascular mortality within a time frame as short as a few years; and many credible pathological mechanisms have been elucidated that lend biological plausibility to these findings. It is the opinion of the writing group that the overall evidence is consistent with a causal relationship between PM(2.5) exposure and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. This body of evidence has grown and been strengthened substantially since the first American Heart Association scientific statement was published. Finally, PM(2.5) exposure is deemed a modifiable factor that contributes to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.

Background: Prior investigations to define ethnic-related differences in the risks, medical treatment, and outcomes of patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) have been limited., Methods: The impact of ethnicity on the risk factor profiles, use of evidence-based medical therapies, and 2-year cardiovascular outcomes were investigated in 2,168 individuals (blacks n = 237, Hispanics n = 115, whites n = 1,816) from the United States with PAD from the international Reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health Registry., Results: Blacks and Hispanics were more likely to have diabetes mellitus and hypertension, whereas whites had a higher rate of diagnosed hypercholesterolemia. Control of blood pressure and cholesterol levels differed significantly in the groups at baseline: elevated blood pressure was present in 55% of blacks versus 48% of Hispanics versus 38% of whites (P < .01), whereas 41% of blacks versus 31% of Hispanics versus 25% of whites had elevated total cholesterol (P < .01). Aspirin use (62% of blacks vs 68% of Hispanics vs 72% of whites, P < .01) and statin use (72% of blacks vs 68% of Hispanics vs 77% of whites, P = .03) also varied significantly. In this context, rates by ethnicity for cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke seemed to be no different at 2 years, at 8.8% for the total population: 11.6% for blacks, 8.5% for whites, and 5.0% for Hispanics (P = .32). Fewer blacks (0.6%) had undergone peripheral arterial bypass surgery compared with whites (3.4%) and Hispanics (5.2%) (P = .02)., Conclusions: Ethnic-related differences have been documented in the prevalence and treatment of several atherosclerotic risk factors known to be associated with PAD, including a variation in the use of surgical revascularization procedures.

There is increasing interest in utilizing novel markers of cardiovascular disease risk, and consequently, there is a need to assess the value of their use. This scientific statement reviews current concepts of risk evaluation and proposes standards for the critical appraisal of risk assessment methods. An adequate evaluation of a novel risk marker requires a sound research design, a representative at-risk population, and an adequate number of outcome events. Studies of a novel marker should report the degree to which it adds to the prognostic information provided by standard risk markers. No single statistical measure provides all the information needed to assess a novel marker, so measures of both discrimination and accuracy should be reported. The clinical value of a marker should be assessed by its effect on patient management and outcomes. In general, a novel risk marker should be evaluated in several phases, including initial proof of concept, prospective validation in independent populations, documentation of incremental information when added to standard risk markers, assessment of effects on patient management and outcomes, and ultimately, cost-effectiveness.